POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

793 [seconds] 08:32:39 617-634-XXXX [Madeline Amy Sweeney from Flight 11. Again answered by Sayer, then authenticated by her friend of ten years: Michael Woodward. An American Airlines Manager of Flight Services.]

Note: the last four digits of the number that she supposedly called, are redacted, and that according to the link above, every call was allegedly to:

'AMERICAN AIRLINES LOGAN AIRPORT, BOSTON'.

Similarly, in the publicly-available phone records for these (three connected) calls; one finds that the 'Terminating' field (which I assume means the number called) printed immediately under the ten-digit 'Originating', is totally redacted:

Now, you may be reading this thinking: oO(Well, maybe they don't want to publicly divulge an employee-only phone line; which is fair enough.)

But, in the FBI's September 14th 2001 document for the aforementioned Michael Woodward; this nugget transpires:

'Woodward was one of three managers on duty in the AA office. ...All of the flight attendants are given the MOD [Manager on Duty] office numbers where Woodward works as manager. Woodward stated there are two telephone lines coming into the MOD office which are 617-634-5352 and 617-634-5351'

Does this possibly signify, that AT&T Claircom, might be in possession of a potentially-damning file; which proves that at least one of those calls was made to a secondary phone line in the same office?

My biggest problem with this calls is, as I understand it, when a flight is reported as skyjacked, the people on the ground who receive such information, should have immediately notified NORAD or some government agency, before engaging in prolonged conversations. Needless to say that, once the call disconnected, that person should have begun making notifications, and not stand by waiting to see if the caller would try to reconnect.

I can't buy all these notification troubles and failures. I'm pretty sure that airlines consider skyjacked aircraft to be a pretty darned serious matter. Serious enough that authorities be notified with haste, and that the authorities have the means to receive emergency calls, no matter what the circumstances.

I envision that emergency response authorities have phone that are dedicated for the purpose of receiving emergency notices and nothing else. As a lay person, that's what I would do, and I'd make sure that control towers and flight managers had these numbers and be admonished to call them at the first sign of trouble. Because these aircraft travel so fast time is of the essence.

Needless to say that, once the call disconnected, that person should have begun making notifications, and not stand by waiting to see if the caller would try to reconnect.

I can't buy all these notification troubles and failures. I'm pretty sure that airlines consider skyjacked aircraft to be a pretty darned serious matter. Serious enough that authorities be notified with haste, and that the authorities have the means to receive emergency calls, no matter what the circumstances.

I would take this to another level.

Time of Sweeney's calls: ~ 8:25 a.m.

Did the call recipients notify authorities immediately (NORAD etc.) or not? Plenty of time to send fighter jets.

Yes, they did; their duty was done.No they did not; they were disciplined (on record) and blamed publicly for the crash into WTC1.

I find it vexing in the extreme the way they play off that it was no big deal to makenotifications, as if the only thing these people could do was try to stay in touchand gather information about the unfolding events. When we know fromthe various documentaries over the years that these notifications of officialslike Norad are must do's that are extremely sensitive protocols.

These people of all people knew that the small window of time, when anythingcould be done would be closing fast. They had training and protocols and yetall they did was continue to chat as if there was nothing else to be done.

'Sayer will answer the phone when Sweeney contacts the flight services office again at 8:32 a.m., but he will pass the call on to Woodward. It is unclear whether all the information that Sayer describes to the FBI, about the problems on Flight 11, is given to him by Sweeney in the current [08:29:25 a.m.] call [e.g. 'Flight 11'], or if she provides some of it to him in the 8:32 a.m. call. [Federal Bureau of Investigation, 9/11/2001, pp. 7-8; 9/11 Commission, 1/25/2004 pdf file; 9/11 Commission, 8/26/2004, pp. 11 pdf file]'

FYI, all of the aforementioned three connected calls, were seemingly ascribed to the flight attendant Sara Low's father's calling card. And unlike the latter two calls, the first of which (the fast-talking "Flight 12" call), ended with a: 'Ground Party Disconnect' (rather than an: 'Air Party Disconnect').

'“The American Airlines FAA Principal Security Inspector (PSI) was notified by Suzanne Clark of American Airlines Corporate Headquarters that an on board flight attendant contacted American Airlines Operations Center and informed that a passenger located in seat 10B shot and killed a passenger in seat 9B at 9:20 a.m.

“The passenger killed was Daniel Lewin, shot by passenger Satam Al Suqami. One bullet was reported to have been fired.”

Sweeney could have agreed to cooperate in a hijack simulation exercise, conducted in a locked, window-less, Logan Airport jet bridge; calling American Airlines' nearby Logan Airport office's line one:

617-634-5351 (a male stranger would probably have had to have intercepted the call to her friend Woodward, then relayed the manager's speech to her, in his own voice).

Meanwhile: unbeknownst to her, another call would be made from a Coach-class Airfone, aboard American Airlines' Flight 11, to a near-identically numbered line two, in the same office:

617-634-5352.

Which would be secretly answered and eventually terminated, at approximately the same time as hers; so that when the (N334AA) plane's AT&T phone logs are published, the Logan office staff would be able to verify most of the number called, the caller's at least likely identity, call: start time and duration; from what would appear to be the allegedly hijacked aircraft.

None of the call recipients would be able to cry foul, because the last four digits are (as I've shown) consistently redacted.

Tragically, after the exercise's end, Sweeney would be fatally-gassed by an obscured, inaccessible, carbon monoxide canister.

793 [seconds] 08:32:39 617-634-XXXX [Madeline Amy Sweeney from Flight 11. Again answered by Sayer, then authenticated by her friend of ten years: Michael Woodward. An American Airlines Manager of Flight Services.]

Note: the last four digits of the number that she supposedly called, are redacted, and that according to the link above, every call was allegedly to:

'AMERICAN AIRLINES LOGAN AIRPORT, BOSTON'.

Similarly, in the publicly-available phone records for these (three connected) calls; one finds that the 'Terminating' field (which I assume means the number called) printed immediately under the ten-digit 'Originating', is totally redacted:

Now, you may be reading this thinking: oO(Well, maybe they don't want to publicly divulge an employee-only phone line; which is fair enough.)

But, in the FBI's September 14th 2001 document for the aforementioned Michael Woodward; this nugget transpires:

'Woodward was one of three managers on duty in the AA office. ...All of the flight attendants are given the MOD [Manager on Duty] office numbers where Woodward works as manager. Woodward stated there are two telephone lines coming into the MOD office which are 617-634-5352 and 617-634-5351'

Does this possibly signify, that AT&T Claircom, might be in possession of a potentially-damning file; which proves that at least one of those calls was made to a secondary phone line in the same office?

Hi where can i find that info please, not that i don't believe it, i do but i need the original source document for a piece i am doing thank you

'...explanatory comments typed into the record...to show that the customer dialed a live AT&T Operator (Operator Services Position Station, or OSPS) and that the “Time is not tracked because OSPS bills.”'

'If you’ve ever had the date on a cell phone, iPod, or computer software mysteriously switch to December 31, 1969, you may have thought it was simply random. However, the answer to this question is a bit of computer trivia.

Unix, the computer operating system used on most servers, workstations and mobile devices, was launched on January 1, 1970, making that date its “epoch date.” What this means is that time began for Unix at midnight on January 1, 1970. Time measurement units are counted from the epoch so that the date and time of events can be specified without question. If a time stamp is somehow reset to 0 and displayed in local time, users will see December 31, 1969 — the day before Unix’s creation.'

Hi poppy, sorry to keep coming back to you but since you seem to be a font of knowledge i am grateful and have another question, in those calls you showed, Sweeneys termination number is hidden. For Betty Ong http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Betty_Ong_call

The terminating number IS shown but it is different to the originating.Now it doesn't say originating/terminating number so i am a little unsure maybe you can clarify.However as i see it, if they are numbers -suggested by the fact that Sweeney and Ongs are exactly the same (although one may expect a difference if they were separate phones, but lets say they just have the originating code/number for the plane.) Anyway if the terminating number is different to originator-that suggest the other end terminated the call. Whereas it would seem sense that if the plane was destroyed, that the call terminated at the end it was made, especially since the operators were not aware of a destruction instantly, as evidenced by them saying "i think we lost her" for Ong that would suggest not that they can't hear her-since at the start we heard "are you there" "can you hear me" so they didn't just hang up. That suggests there would be a minute or two between the cessation of the call and since the news of it was not public until 8.49 at the earliest. They must have kept that line open at least one minute

'Call Suddenly Cut Off - Woodward then hears what he will describe as “very, very loud static on the other end” of the line. [ABC News, 7/18/2002] After a short time, the line goes dead. ...The call between Sweeney and Woodward lasts “approximately 12 minutes” and ends at around 8:44 a.m., according to the 9/11 Commission. [9/11 Commission, 2004, pp. 4; 9/11 Commission, 8/26/2004, pp. 11, 14 pdf file] But according to a summary of phone calls from the hijacked flights presented at the 2006 trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the call began at 8:32 a.m. and 39 seconds, and lasts 13 minutes and 13 seconds, meaning it ends at 8:45 a.m. and 52 seconds.* [US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, 7/31/2006]'

'Call Suddenly Cut Off - Woodward then hears what he will describe as “very, very loud static on the other end” of the line. [ABC News, 7/18/2002] After a short time, the line goes dead. ...The call between Sweeney and Woodward lasts “approximately 12 minutes” and ends at around 8:44 a.m., according to the 9/11 Commission. [9/11 Commission, 2004, pp. 4; 9/11 Commission, 8/26/2004, pp. 11, 14 pdf file] But according to a summary of phone calls from the hijacked flights presented at the 2006 trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the call began at 8:32 a.m. and 39 seconds, and lasts 13 minutes and 13 seconds, meaning it ends at 8:45 a.m. and 52 seconds.* [US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, 7/31/2006]'

Therefore, I don't know that the phone system's possible destruction, had much to do with the termination of those calls.

I suppose the only real test is to destroy a phone making a call and see from subsequent records which end is then listed as terminating the call.

I saw on the Betty call that it says started at 18 mins past billed from 19 min past but is cut short.

You can correct me if i am wrong but since i just moved into the phonecalls i want to be correct.

OFFICIALLY

Ong calls, the call lasts 25 mins appx. The first four minutes only are recorded. The rest is just the operations centre personnel

Is that correct so far as the official story?

I have not seen a call record of Bettys call that covers 20+ minutes only a brief 2 minute one, if that is correct then surely there should be a 2 minute recording too?

I believe from the transcripts seen, there is a loop of parts of that call, meaning it was longer than 4 minutes or it was shorter than that. If it was longer, then parts were cut and looped to match the 4 minute recording time, if it was shorter then there was a reason it was cut before the full four minutes and the loop was created to give the impression of four minutes. I will be producing the analysis in due course if i am correct. But i need to check i am right with my supposition on what the official line was

I believe that the original Ong recording, was longer than the official 4-minute version; because its abbreviated opening explanitory sentence, mentions no crucial flight number; tacitly-prompting Winston Sadler to naturally ask for it, which he predictably does, then a strangely-chorused and uncharacteristically succinct "FLIGHT 12." speech recording is promptly triggered (consecutively followed by a similarly provident and unconvincing "Yes." sample).

If I'm correct, then it's imo probable, that: Ong's call was censored, the cabin noise was phony and played live.

I would take this to another level.Time of Sweeney's calls: ~ 8:25 a.m.Did the call recipients notify authorities immediately (NORAD etc.) or not? Plenty of time to send fighter jets.

The fighters were actually in place, there were two out of McGuire AFB (they took off at about the time the "AA11" took off), possibly with tanker plane, in the air south of Long Island less than 50nmi from Manhattan, being in position to intercept both "AA11" and "UA175", yet for some reason they've made a trip to northermost Maine instead and haven't turned back before 5gon attack happened. One of the two fighters which didn't transpond at all later even switched to military squawk and patrolled NY, long after the attacks. (This very much reminds me about the other Andrews fighters formation and their trip to the North Carolina).

I believe that the original Ong recording, was longer than the official 4-minute version; because its abbreviated opening explanitory sentence, mentions no crucial flight number; tacitly-prompting Winston Sadler to naturally ask for it, which he predictably does, then a strangely-chorused and uncharacteristically succinct "FLIGHT 12." speech recording is promptly triggered (consecutively followed by a similarly provident and unconvincing "Yes." sample).

If I'm correct, then it's imo probable, that: Ong's call was censored, the cabin noise was phony and played live.

The transcripts are messed up with the wansley requested playback differing from later released audio.Anyhow, also i not that Minter the initial recipient of Ongs call, can't find her emergency button, so she calls Sadler who can and does record, then Gonzalez is patched in, she does not ask if the call is being recorded nor does she say she pressed her own emergency button. She should have, if patched on the line have been as able to record Ong as Sadler and she IS recorded herself but Ong isn't Doesn't add up going to have run through the connections and hand overs again